Explore the vast range of titles available.

Dabrafenib is a potent and selective inhibitor of BRAF-mutant kinase that is approved, as monotherapy or in combination with trametinib (mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) kinase (MEK) inhibitor), for unresectable or metastatic BRAF -mutated melanoma, advanced non-small cell lung cancer and anaplastic thyroid cancer harbouring the BRAF V600E mutation. The recommended dose of dabrafenib is 150 mg twice daily (bid) under fasted conditions. After single oral administration of the recommended dose, the absolute oral bioavailability ( F ) of dabrafenib is 95%. Dabrafenib shows a time-dependent increase in apparent clearance (CL/ F ) following multiple doses, which is likely due to induction of its own metabolism through cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Therefore, steady state is reached only after 14 days of daily dose administration. Moreover, the extent of this auto-induction process is dependent on the dose, which explains why dabrafenib systemic exposure at steady state increases less than dose proportionally over the dose range of 75–300 mg bid. The main elimination route of dabrafenib is the oxidative metabolism via CYP3A4/2C8 and biliary excretion. Among the three major metabolites identified, hydroxy-dabrafenib appears to contribute to the pharmacological activity. Age, sex and body weight did not have any clinically significant influence on plasma exposure to dabrafenib. No dose adjustment is needed for patients with mild renal or hepatic impairment, whereas the impacts of severe impairment on dabrafenib pharmacokinetics remain unknown. Considering that dabrafenib is a substrate of CYP3A4/2C8 and is a CYP3A4/2B6/2C inducer, drug–drug interactions are expected with dabrafenib. The relationship between clinical outcomes and plasma exposure to dabrafenib and hydroxy-dabrafenib should be investigated more deeply.

A large interindividual variability has been observed in anti Programmed cell Death 1 (anti-PD1) therapies efficacy. The aim of this study is to assess the correlation of soluble PD-1 (sPD-1), soluble Programmed cell Death Ligand 1 (sPD-L1), Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A (VEGFA), soluble CD40 ligand (sCD40L) and soluble CD44 (sCD44), with survival in nivolumab-treated metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Plasma biomarkers were assayed at baseline and after two cycles of nivolumab. A cut-off of positivity for sPD-1, sPD-L1 and sCD40L expressions was defined as a plasma level above the lower limit of quantification. Baseline sPD-1 and sPD-L1 levels were subsequently analyzed in a control group of EGFR-mutated (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) NSCLC patients. Association between survival and biomarkers was investigated using Cox proportional hazard regression model. Eighty-seven patients were included (51 nivolumab-treated patients, 36 in EGFR-mutated group). In nivolumab group, baseline sPD-1, sPD-L1 and sCD40L were positive for 15(29.4%), 27(52.9%) and 18(50%) patients, respectively. We defined a composite criteria (sCombo) corresponding to sPD-1 and/or sPD-L1 positivity for each patient. In nivolumab group, baseline sCombo positivity was associated with shorter median progression-free survival (PFS) (78 days 95%CI (55–109) vs. 658 days (222-not reached); HR: 4.12 (1.95–8.71), p = 0.0002) and OS (HR: 3.99(1.63–9.80), p = 0.003). In multivariate analysis, baseline sCombo independently correlated with PFS (HR: 2.66 (1.17–6.08), p = 0.02) but not OS. In EGFR-mutated group, all patients were baseline sCombo positive; therefore this factor was not associated with survival. After two cycles of nivolumab, an increased or stable sPD-1 level independently correlated with longer PFS (HR: 0.49, 95%CI (0.30–0.80), p = 0.004) and OS (HR: 0.39, 95%CI (0.21–0.71), p = 0.002). VEGFA, sCD40L and sCD44 did not correlate with survival. We propose a composite biomarker using sPD-1and sPDL-1 to predict nivolumab efficacy in NSCLC patients. A larger validation study is warranted.

Abstract Background The prescription of antitumor drugs has often been associated with drug-related problems. Pretherapeutic multidisciplinary risk assessment programs including pharmaceutical care have been established to secure the initiation of injectable and oral antitumor therapies. This prospective cross-sectional double-center study evaluated the clinical and economic impact of the pharmacist in detecting drug-related problems in patients initiating antitumor therapies. Materials and Methods Following pharmaceutical consultations, pharmaceutical interventions were validated by a multidisciplinary team. A committee of independent clinical experts assessed the potential clinical impact of drug-drug interactions. The association of clinical variables with pharmaceutical interventions was tested using a multivariate logistic regression model. Pharmacist cost of the program was assessed by valuing pharmacists’ time at their salaries and compared with potentially avoided costs. Results Four hundred thirty-eight patients with solid tumors were included: 62% males, mean age of 65 ± 13 years, and average of 6 medications. Half of the patients required at least one pharmaceutical intervention and independent factors associated with pharmaceutical interventions were the number of medications (5-9 vs <5: OR = 2.91 [95% CI 1.82-4.65], P < .001) and the type of antitumor treatment (immunotherapy vs intravenous chemotherapy: OR = 0.35 [95% CI 0.18-0.68], P = .002). One hundred seventy-four out of 266 pharmaceutical interventions (130 patients) involved clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Pharmacist costs were estimated to range between €4899 and €6125. Average costs were estimated at €11.4-14.3 per patient. Avoided hospitalization costs were estimated to be €180 633. Conclusion Clinical pharmacists contribute to the cost-effective reduction of drug-related problems in pre-therapeutic assessment programs for patients with cancer. Pre-therapeutic multidisciplinary risk assessment programs including pharmaceutical care have been established to secure the initiation of injectable and oral antitumor therapies. This study evaluated the clinical and economic impact of the pharmacist in detecting drug-related problems in patients initiating antitumor therapies. Graphical Abstract Graphical Abstract

PurposePazopanib is approved in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and soft-tissue sarcoma at a flat-fixed dose despite a large pharmacokinetics interindividual variability and a narrow therapeutic index. To our knowledge, pazopanib exposure in patients with gastrointestinal resections (GIR) has not been described. This report focuses on feasibility of pharmacokinetics-guided dose escalation in these patients and clinical implications for their management.MethodA retrospective data collection was performed for three patients with GIR treated with pazopanib, including pazopanib plasma concentrations (high-performance liquid chromatography with UV detection) and treatment adherence (Girerd score).Case presentationFirst patient (55-year-old man, RCC, gastric bypass surgery) pazopanib Cmin,ss at day 39 was 4.1 mg/L. Dose escalation to 1800 mg/day fractionated allowed to reach Cmin,ss of 18.5 mg/L (target threshold in RCC patients: 20.5 mg/L). Patient 2 (50-year-old woman, metastatic myxofibrosarcoma, gastric band) showed Cmin,ss of 4.0 mg/L at day 13. In patient 3 (49-year-old man, gastric malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, gastrectomy), Cmin,ss at day 13 was 2.7 mg/L. For these two patients, intake with food and dose fractioning only slightly increased pazopanib Cmin,ss to 12.0 mg/L and 6.5 mg/L, respectively (therapeutic threshold in sarcoma patients: 27 mg/L). Treatment adherence was good in all patients.ConclusionOptimal pazopanib exposure cannot be achieved in patients with GIR, and thus, other therapeutic strategies should be encouraged. Pretherapeutic assessment seems crucial to evaluate factors as bariatric surgery that may impact pazopanib concentrations. Therapeutic drug monitoring could be helpful to optimize pazopanib response in these patients.

Identifying predictive biomarkers of drug response is of key importance to improve therapy management and drug selection in cancer therapy. To date, the influence of drug exposure and pharmacogenetic variants on sorafenib-induced toxicity remains poorly documented. The aim of this pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) study was to investigate the relationship between early toxicity and drug exposure or pharmacogenetic variants in unselected adult outpatients treated with single-agent sorafenib for advanced solid tumors. Toxicity was recorded in 54 patients on days 15 and 30 after treatment initiation and sorafenib exposure was assessed in 51 patients. The influence of polymorphisms in CYP3A5, UGT1A9, ABCB1 and ABCG2 was examined in relation to sorafenib exposure and toxicity. Clinical characteristics, drug exposure and pharmacogenetic variants were tested univariately for association with toxicities. Candidate variables with p<0.1 were analyzed in a multivariate analysis. Gender was the sole parameter independently associated with sorafenib exposure (p = 0.0008). Multivariate analysis showed that increased cumulated sorafenib (AUC(cum)) was independently associated with any grade ≥ 3 toxicity (p = 0.037); UGT1A9 polymorphism (rs17868320) with grade ≥ 2 diarrhea (p = 0.015) and female gender with grade ≥ 2 hand-foot skin reaction (p = 0.018). Using ROC curve, the threshold AUC(cum) value of 3,161 mg/L.h was associated with the highest risk to develop any grade ≥ 3 toxicity (p = 0.018). In this preliminary study, increased cumulated drug exposure and UGT1A9 polymorphism (rs17868320) identified patients at high risk for early sorafenib-induced severe toxicity. Further PK/PD studies on larger population are warranted to confirm these preliminary results.

Background: Pazopanib (PAZ) is an oral angiogenesis inhibitor approved to treat soft tissue sarcoma (STS) but associated with a large interpatient pharmacokinetic (PK) variability and narrow therapeutic index. We aimed to define the specific threshold of PAZ trough concentration (Cmin) associated with better progression-free survival (PFS) in STS patients. Methods: In this observational study, PAZ Cmin was monitored over the treatment course. For the primary endpoint, the 3-month PFS in STS was analyzed with logistic regression. Second, we performed exposure–overall survival (OS) (Cox model plus Kaplan–Meier analysis/log-rank test) and exposure–toxicity analyses. Results: Ninety-five STS patients were eligible for pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) assessment. In the multivariable analysis, PAZ Cmin < 27 mg/L was independently associated with a risk of progression at 3 months (odds ratio (OR) 4.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.47–12.12), p = 0.008). A higher average of PAZ Cmin over the first 3 months was associated with a higher risk of grade 3–4 toxicities according to the NCI-CTCAE version 5.0 (OR 1.07 per 1 mg/L increase, CI95 (1.02–1.13), p = 0.007). Conclusion: PAZ Cmin ≥ 27 mg/L was independently associated with improved 3-month PFS in STS patients. Pharmacokinetically-guided dosing could be helpful to optimize the clinical management of STS patients in daily clinical practice.

Summary Background Older non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients under erlotinib are reported to experience more acute toxicity. We hypothesized that modifications in erlotinib pharmacokinetics might explain this observation. Methods A monocentric prospective clinico-pharmacological study included stage IIIb/IV NSCLC consecutive pts. treated with erlotinib. The plasma concentration of erlotinib (Ce) was measured at steady state on day 15. We studied the relationship between age > 75 years, and Ce, using the Mann-Whitney U test and with the occurrence of acute toxicity, using a Fisher’s test. Results A total of 53 pts. were analyzed. Median age was 68 years (31–83), 56 % were female. All pts. > 75 years experienced toxicity: all grade acute adverse events were 1.6 fold more frequent (100 % vs 61 %; OR 95 % CI [1.9-INF]; p  = 0.003). At day 15, Ce increased with age. Over 75 years old, the mean Ce was 1.5 fold higher: 2091 ng/mL (95 % CI [1476; 2706]) vs 1359 (95 % CI [1029; 1689]; p  = 0.024). In pts. over 80 years old, the mean Ce was doubled: 2729 (95 % CI [1961; 3497]) vs 1358 ng/mL (95 % CI [1070; 1646]; p  = 0.0019). Reduced lean body mass over 75 years (median 36.6 kg versus 49.1 kg) might account for these differences. Finally, the risk of early erlotinib discontinuation was increased by 11 in older pts. (33 % vs 3 % OR 17.2; 95 % CI [1.7; 892.5] p  = .005). Conclusion The risk of overexposure to erlotinib increases with age. Reduced lean body mass may explain erlotinib pharmacokinetics and excessive acute toxicity in the elderly.

A disintegrin and metalloproteinase 9 (ADAM9) possesses potent metastasis-inducing capacities and is highly expressed in several cancer cells. Previous work has shown that ADAM9 participates in the adhesive–invasive phenotype in lung cancer cells in vitro. In this study, we evaluated whether ADAM9 expression plays a critical role in metastatic processes in vivo and in angiogenesis. We first found that high ADAM9 expression was correlated with poor lung adenocarcinoma patient prognosis on Prognoscan data base. In vivo model based on intravenous injection in nude mice showed that a stable downregulation of ADAM9 in A549 (TrA549 A9-) cells was associated with a lower number of nodules in the lung, suggesting lower potentials for extravasation and metastasis. On a subcutaneous xenograft we showed that TrA549 A9− produced significantly smaller tumours and exhibited fewer neovessels. In addition, in vitro human umbilical vein endothelial cells exposed to supernatant from TrA549 A9− could reduce the formation of more vessel-like structures. To further understand the mechanism, a human antibody array analysis confirmed that five cytokines were downregulated in TrA549 A9− cells. Interleukin 8 was the most significantly downregulated, and its interaction with CXCR2 was implicated in angiogenesis on an in vitro model. These results emphasize the critical influence of ADAM9 on lung cancer progression and aggressiveness. ADAM9 should at least be a marker of cancer aggressiveness and a potential therapeutic target for cancer treatment.

Objectives The objective was to quantify the risk dynamics for the sorafenib-induced hand–foot syndrome (HFS) and to explore by simulations the dose–toxicity relationships according to different dosing regimens. Patients and methods Eighty-nine patients treated with sorafenib were considered: Treatment duration and regimen, and number and frequency of HFS observations were highly variable. A nonlinear mixed-effect model was built to link sorafenib administrations to the risk of each HFS score, through a latent variable model. Model evaluation was driven by goodness-of-fit and simulation-based diagnostics. Impact of sorafenib regimen on HFS dynamics was evaluated by simulations. A surrogate measure of benefit-to-risk ratio was calculated by using the concept of utility function, accounting for efficacy on tumor growth inhibition and severe HFS risk. Results and discussion An original pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic model for sorafenib-induced HFS, including the kinetics of a latent variable model, relating sorafenib administrations, per se its exposure, to HFS dynamics is proposed. From the model simulations, it appears that the more the daily dose is fractioned, the more the patients are at risk of HFS. Interestingly, the number of daily occasions was found more influential than the dose itself. Taking into account tumor growth inhibition in the utility function, the twice-daily administration schedule is favored for daily doses >600 mg. This approach illustrates how understanding the dynamic relationship between drug administrations and a limiting adverse event may help to control toxicity and adequately adjust treatment modalities.

Concomitant direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and tyrosine kinase inhibitor targeting vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (anti-VEGF TKI) have been associated with a higher risk of bleeding. Nevertheless, concomitant administration seems frequent in clinical practice in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis and appears to be safe according to the retrospective study by Boileve A. et al. But the risk of an additional pharmacokinetic interaction between anti-VEGF TKI and DOACs must be considered, in case of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibition by the TKI. We describe a case report with a major bleeding event in a renal metastatic cancer patient treated with cabozantinib and rivaroxaban. This case highlights the difficult therapeutic decision in a complex patient with cancer-associated thrombosis, who refused the anticoagulant subcutaneous route. Accumulation of bleeding risk factors (genito-urinary tumor localization) was additive to several pharmacodynamic interactions (acetylsalicylic acid, venlafaxine) and a potential pharmacokinetic interaction between cabozantinib and rivaroxaban. Indeed, cabozantinib-related P-glycoprotein inhibition could have led to a supratherapeutic level of rivaroxaban, contributing partly to the bleeding event. Before combining an anti-VEGF TKI and DOACs, a multidisciplinary pretherapeutic assessment seems crucial to evaluate the patient's bleeding risk factors, pharmacodynamic interactions, and the risk of pharmacokinetic interactions mediated by P-gp.